Director's Report Details

The Special Investigations Unit is a civilian law enforcement agency that investigates incidents involving an official where there has been death, serious injury, the discharge of a firearm at a person or an allegation of sexual assault. Under the Special Investigations Unit Act, 2019 (SIU Act), officials are defined as police officers, special constables of the Niagara Parks Commission and peace officers under the Legislative Assembly Act. The SIU’s jurisdiction covers more than 50 municipal, regional and provincial police services across Ontario.

Under the SIU Act, the Director of the SIU must determine based on the evidence gathered in an investigation whether there are reasonable grounds to believe that a criminal offence was committed. If such grounds exist, the Director has the authority to lay a criminal charge against the official. Alternatively, in cases where no reasonable grounds exist, the Director cannot lay charges. Where no charges are laid, a report of the investigation is prepared and released publicly, except in the case of reports dealing with allegations of sexual assault, in which case the SIU Director may consult with the affected person and exercise a discretion to not publicly release the report having regard to the affected person’s privacy interests.

Special Investigations Unit Act, 2019

Pursuant to section 34, certain information may not be included in this report. This information may include, but is not limited to, the following:

• The name of, and any information identifying, a subject official, witness official, civilian witness or affected person.
• Information that may result in the identity of a person who reported that they were sexually assaulted being revealed in connection with the sexual assault.
• Information that, in the opinion of the SIU Director, could lead to a risk of serious harm to a person.
• Information that discloses investigative techniques or procedures.
• Information, the release of which is prohibited or restricted by law.
• Information in which a person’s privacy interest in not having the information published clearly outweighs the public interest in having the information published.

Freedom of Information and Protection of Personal Privacy Act

Pursuant to section 14 (i.e., law enforcement), certain information may not be included in this report. This information may include, but is not limited to, the following:

• Confidential investigative techniques and procedures used by law enforcement agencies; and
• Information that could reasonably be expected to interfere with a law enforcement matter or an investigation undertaken with a view to a law enforcement proceeding.

Pursuant to section 21 (i.e., personal privacy), protected personal information is not included in this report. This information may include, but is not limited to, the following:

• The names of persons, including civilian witnesses, and subject and witness officials;
• Location information;
• Witness statements and evidence gathered in the course of the investigation provided to the SIU in confidence; and
• Other identifiers which are likely to reveal personal information about individuals involved in the investigation.

Personal Health Information Protection Act, 2004

Pursuant to this legislation, any information related to the personal health of identifiable individuals is not included.

Other proceedings, processes, and investigations

Information may also have been excluded from this report because its release could undermine the integrity of other proceedings involving the same incident, such as criminal proceedings, coroner’s inquests, other public proceedings and/or other law enforcement investigations.

Pursuant to section 15 of the SIU Act, the SIU may investigate the conduct of officials, be they police officers, special constables of the Niagara Parks Commission or peace officers under the Legislative Assembly Act, that may have resulted in death, serious injury, sexual assault or the discharge of a firearm at a person.

A person sustains a “serious injury” for purposes of the SIU’s jurisdiction if they: sustain an injury as a result of which they are admitted to hospital; suffer a fracture to the skull, or to a limb, rib or vertebra; suffer burns to a significant proportion of their body; lose any portion of their body; or, as a result of an injury, experience a loss of vision or hearing.

In addition, a “serious injury” means any other injury sustained by a person that is likely to interfere with the person’s health or comfort and is not transient or trifling in nature.

This report relates to the SIU’s investigation into the serious injuries of a 54-year-old man (the “Complainant”).

Notification of the SIU[1]

On November 13, 2024, the Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) contacted the SIU with the following information.

On November 12, 2024, at 8:25 p.m., a woman telephoned the OPP to report her tenant, the Complainant, was acting erratically at a residence in Burk’s Falls. OPP officers arrived at the residence at 8:32 p.m. and found the woman had moved outside to her vehicle after the Complainant made threats to cause her harm. At 8:40 p.m., the officers attempted to arrest the Complainant. He advanced at the officers while uttering threats and was punched in the face by one of them. A short struggle ensued before the officers gained control of the Complainant. An ambulance was requested by police and the Complainant was transported to the Huntsville District Memorial Hospital where, at 1:03 a.m., November 13, 2024, he was diagnosed with a fractured nasal bone.

The Team

Date and time team dispatched: 2024/11/13 at 10:00 a.m.

Date and time SIU arrived on scene: 2024/11/13 at 12:56 p.m.

Number of SIU Investigators assigned: 4

Number of SIU Forensic Investigators assigned: 0

Affected Person (aka “Complainant”):

54-year-old male; interviewed; medical records obtained and reviewed

The Complainant was interviewed on November 25, 2024.

Civilian Witnesses (CW)

CW #1 Interviewed

CW #2 Interviewed

The civilian witnesses were interviewed on November 13, 2024.

Subject Official (SO)

SO Declined interview, as is the subject official’s legal right; notes received and reviewed

Witness Officials (WO)

WO #1 Interviewed; notes received and reviewed

WO #2 Interviewed; notes received and reviewed

The witness officials were interviewed between November 22 and 27, 2024.

The Scene

The events in question transpired in the kitchen of a residence in Burk’s Falls.

Video/Audio/Photographic Evidence[2]

OPP Communications Recordings

On November 12, 2024, at 8:17 p.m., CW #2 called 911 to report her tenant, the Complainant, had picked her up and thrown her across a carport. She stated he was yelling and screaming, and saying he wanted to party. CW #2 indicated the Complainant appeared to be experiencing a mental breakdown.

WO #2 was dispatched to the incident. WO #1, partnered with the SO, volunteered to assist on the call.

The SO later requested an ambulance. He reported they had a person in custody for an assault and the individual had a broken nose.

The SO called the OPP communications centre. He explained to the dispatcher: “He came right at us and pushed me and went to punch me and I just cracked him once, and then he went down, and we were able to ‘cuff him up.”

Materials Obtained from Police Service

Upon request, the SIU obtained the following records from the OPP between November 21, 2024, and December 13, 2024:

• Arrest Report
• General Report
• Computer-aided Dispatch Report
• Notes - WO #2
• Notes - WO #1
• Notes - the SO
• Communications recordings

Materials Obtained from Other Sources

The SIU obtained the Complainant’s medical record from the Muskoka Algonquin Healthcare – Huntsville Site (Huntsville District Memorial Hospital) on December 6, 2024.

The evidence collected by the SIU, including interviews with the Complainant and two officers that participated in his arrest, gives rise to the following scenario. As was his legal right, the SO did not agree an interview with the SIU. He did authorize the release of his notes.

In the evening of November 12, 2024, the SO, together with WO #1 and WO #2, arrived at a residence in Burk’s Falls. CW #2 had contacted police to report being assaulted by the Complainant. The Complainant was renting a room at the address.

The officers met and spoke with CW #2 and her sister, CW #1, at the bottom of the driveway to the house. The siblings described the circumstances leading to their 911 call and confirmed they had each been assaulted by the Complainant, who appeared to them of unsound mind.

The SO, followed by WO #1, entered the house to speak to the Complainant. An agitated Complainant immediately walked up to the SO and hugged him. The officer declined when the Complainant offered him a kiss, and persuaded him to take a seat at the kitchen table where they could talk. The Complainant spoke nonsensically and became upset when the SO refused to go outside to find him a friend. He stood from his seat, advanced on the officer and grabbed his torso with both hands. The SO stepped back and punched him in the face when it appeared the Complainant was about to punch the officer. WO #1 intervened and assisted the SO in forcing him to the floor, the latter delivering a punch to the Complainant’s back in the process. The Complainant struggled against the officers’ efforts to handcuff him on the floor but was eventually subdued and taken into custody.

The Complainant was seen at hospital after his arrest and diagnosed with fractures of the nose.

Section 25(1), Criminal Code - Protection of Persons Acting Under Authority

25 (1) Every one who is required or authorized by law to do anything in the administration or enforcement of the law

(a) as a private person,

(b) as a peace officer or public officer,

(c) in aid of a peace officer or public officer, or

(d) by virtue of his office,

is, if he acts on reasonable grounds, justified in doing what he is required or authorized to do and in using as much force as is necessary for that purpose.

The Complainant was seriously injured in the course of his arrest by OPP officers on November 12, 2024. The SIU was notified of the incident and initiated an investigation, naming the SO the subject official. The investigation is now concluded. On my assessment of the evidence, there are no reasonable rounds to believe that the SO committed a criminal offence in connection with the Complainant’s arrest and injuries.

Pursuant to section 25(1) of the Criminal Code, police officers are immune from criminal liability for force used in the course of their duties provided such force was reasonably necessary in the execution of an act that they were required or authorized to do by law.

The officers, having spoken to CW #1 and CW #2, had grounds to arrest the Complainant for assault. When the Complainant placed his hands the second time on the SO, he was also subject to arrest for another assault.

The SO used only necessary force in aid of the Complainant’s arrest. The Complainant had approached him aggressively, placed hands on him, and was seemingly preparing to punch the officer when the officer took reasonable action. The officer was entitled to defend himself and did so with like force. The takedown was also warranted. The Complainant was in a fighting mood, and it was reasonable to anticipate he would physically resist arrest. Forcing him to the ground, assisted with a punch to the back by the SO and a leg sweep by WO #1, made sense as it would position the officers to better deal with a combative Complainant. In fact, the Complainant did struggle against the officers’ efforts on the floor, but was eventually controlled and handcuffed without need for further strikes.

In the result, while I accept that the Complainant’s injuries were incurred in the altercation that marked his arrest, I am unable to reasonably conclude they were attributable to unlawful conduct on the part of the SO. As such, there is no basis for proceeding with criminal charges in this case. The file is closed.

Date: March 3, 2025

Electronically approved by

Joseph Martino

Director

Special Investigations Unit